college scorecard

It is important to know how to fix things and help people stay healthy. But it may be time for politicians and pundits to
I look forward to the next iteration of the College Scorecard, when a commitment to social responsibility and community service
When the U.S. Department of Education released its first College Scorecard in September, the media narrative was that college rankings would become more reliable, because they could take advantage of large amounts of federally verified data.
As if college admissions wasn't confusing enough, now we have yet another ranking system to supposedly make it more transparent.
We shouldn't separate the front end and back end conversations about the costs of education. It is time to link borrowing with repayment at the front end. Then, and only then, will we be able to truly look at college affordability
The Obama administration's College Scorecard, while perhaps a good idea in theory, has serious shortcomings, as it does not acknowledge regional differences, fails to break down the data by field of study, and ignores the impact of transfer students and drop-outs.
Taxpayers pay thousands so student can train for very low-paying jobs at salons.
A new government website is helping Americans make more educated decisions about where they go to college.
Let's be clear that more information is a good thing, showcasing the complexity and diversity of offerings available in American higher education. There are, however, at least three issues that must be addressed for the College Scorecard to work well.
The College Scorecard completely ignores the increasingly non-traditional nature of the nation's undergraduate student body today, and instead, presents data as if most college students are privileged children whiling away four years in some grove of academic luxury.
For the federal government, efforts to score colleges and universities does not square up to the history of how higher education developed.
Colleges and universities that prepare a diverse array of students for life, responsible citizenship and successful careers may, as a result, be ranked as "third tier" institutions.
President Obama is right to emphasize greater access to college for historically underserved populations, but this is not the way to achieve that goal.
A college education should also impress on students the importance -- the absolute necessity -- of a meaningful life in which they get to define success for themselves. Learn to play the clarinet. Read a Brontë novel. Coach a basketball team. Or just spend an hour walking a dog.
The underlying tragedy will be that national policymakers and the higher education community will likely be caught up in an acrimonious debate that will only lead ultimately to a standoff. But the rhetoric masks far deeper problems that American higher education must address soon.
April is Financial Literacy Month! What steps will you take to get financially fit?
The College Scorecard -- a recent White House effort to help Americans find the best value for their education dollars -- doesn't do enough to help the disturbing number of people for whom college continues to be unattainable.
Although it provides college-bound students with some useful information, it misleads them about institutional performance by focusing on the six-year graduation rate to "score" colleges and universities. Use of the six-year rate is misleading for two primary reasons.